CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Claim of Keselman v. New York City Transit Authority

Claimant, injured in 1986, initially established a right shoulder injury. The Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed this but denied a causally related neck injury in 1996. After another application in 1998 alleging a worsened neck condition, the Workers’ Compensation Law Judge found a causally related neck injury and permanent partial disability, awarding benefits from February 5, 1998, which the Board affirmed. Separately, the Board also ruled the employer was entitled to credit schedule payments against disability payments made after February 5, 1998. The court affirmed both decisions, finding substantial evidence supported the deterioration of the neck injury post-1996 and that schedule awards are independent of actual disability periods, thus allowing the employer's credit.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilitySchedule AwardDisability PaymentsNeck InjuryRight Shoulder InjuryCausally Related InjuryReopening CaseMedical EvidenceMRI
References
7
Case No. SAC 0340252
Regular
Oct 24, 2007

ROY HOWARD vs. MERCER STAFFING, aka AMERICAN STAFF RESOURCES, CASCADE NATIONAL INSURANCE, in liquidation, CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION

This case concerns whether temporary disability payments should extend indefinitely after an industrial back and shoulder injury. The Appeals Board determined that Labor Code section 4656(c)(1) limits aggregate temporary disability payments to 104 weeks within a two-year period from the *first payment* of temporary disability, not the date disability is owed. Therefore, the award was amended to terminate payments on January 28, 2007, the two-year anniversary of the initial payment.

Labor Code section 4656(c)(1)temporary disability indemnitydate of commencement of temporary disability payment104 compensable weeksaggregate disability paymentspetition for reconsiderationFindings and AwardWorkers' Compensation Appeals Boardindustrial injurytruck driver
References
1
Case No. 2015-05-0303
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 30, 2017

Girgis, Kaled v. LaCosta, Inc.

Kaled Girgis, an employee of LaCosta, Inc., injured his back at a Bridgestone plant. LaCosta initially denied the claim, leading Mr. Girgis to seek treatment independently, incurring over $90,000 in medical bills. After litigation, LaCosta accepted the compensability of the claim, agreeing to pay temporary disability, permanent partial disability, mileage, and ongoing treatment by Dr. Sanat Dixit. The remaining dispute concerned whether LaCosta should pay Mr. Girgis directly for his past, unpaid medical charges or if the providers must submit their bills under the workers' compensation fee schedule. The Court ruled that providers must submit their charges to LaCosta or its carrier for payment under the fee schedule, unless Mr. Girgis can prove out-of-pocket payments for direct reimbursement.

Medical Benefits PaymentWorkers' Compensation ClaimsTemporary DisabilityPermanent Partial DisabilityMedical Fee ScheduleDirect ReimbursementEmployer Medical LiabilityUnauthorized Medical TreatmentSpinal InjuryOrthopedic Care
References
4
Case No. ADJ2759696 (VNO 0492027)
Regular
Oct 11, 2010

WOON YOUNG PARK vs. FILM PAYMENT SERVICES, INC., CHARTIS INSURANCE

The Board granted reconsideration, rescinding the WCJ's decision on the defendant's credit for overpaid temporary disability. The defendant is allowed credit for temporary disability payments made from March 26, 2009, to June 3, 2009, at the temporary disability rate. Further credit is granted for payments made from June 4, 2009, to December 7, 2009, at the permanent disability rate of $185.00 per week. The Board denied further credit due to insufficient evidence regarding post-AME report overpayments.

Petition for ReconsiderationPermanent DisabilityTemporary DisabilityCreditStipulated AwardAgreed Medical ExaminationPermanent and StationarySection 4909Abuse of DiscretionDue Process
References
0
Case No. SAC 345456
Regular
Jun 05, 2008

CONNIE SOTOLONGO vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA / EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, STATE CONTRACT SERVICES

This case clarifies that Labor Code section 4656(c)(1) imposes an aggregate 104-week limit on temporary disability indemnity payments within a two-year period for any single injury. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board held that this limit applies to both temporary total and temporary partial disability payments, regardless of the specific type of temporary disability. This interpretation aligns with the statutory language and the Legislature's intent to create a broad, time-based cap on temporary disability benefits.

Labor Code section 4656(c)(1)temporary total disabilitytemporary partial disabilityaggregate limitcompensable weekstwo-year periodIndustrial Disability LeaveSB 899legislative intentstatutory construction
References
10
Case No. 2016-01-0035 / 67325-2014
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 07, 2017

Findley, Jack v. Volswagen Group of America, Inc.

This case involves an employee, Jack Keith Findley, who sustained a back injury while working for Volkswagen. He sought temporary and additional permanent partial disability benefits, leading to a dispute over his impairment rating, maximum medical improvement date, and the compensability of his condition. The Court of Workers' Compensation Claims sided with Mr. Findley, awarding him the requested disability benefits and future medical care under Dr. Jolley, based on Dr. Hodges' medical opinion regarding his work-related injury and functional limitations. The court also allowed Volkswagen to offset short-term disability payments.

Workers' CompensationPermanent Partial DisabilityTemporary Partial DisabilityMedical BenefitsImpairment RatingMaximum Medical ImprovementVoluntary ResignationMedical Opinion ConflictBack InjuryLumbar Disc Herniation
References
5
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Donaldson v. Texas Department of Aging & Disability Services

David Donaldson appealed a trial court's summary judgment in favor of the Texas Department of Aging and Disability Services (DADS) on claims of race and disability discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment under the TCHRA and Title VII. Donaldson, an African-American employee diagnosed with multiple conditions including prostate cancer and PTSD, alleged DADS failed to accommodate his disabilities and discriminated against him through various adverse actions, culminating in his termination. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment for DADS on the race discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment claims, finding insufficient evidence of discriminatory intent or materially adverse actions in those areas. However, the court reversed and remanded the reasonable accommodation claim, concluding that Donaldson presented a fact issue regarding DADS's failure to provide continued assistance for his disabilities despite initial accommodations. This decision partially reverses the trial court's judgment, necessitating further proceedings on the reasonable accommodation aspect of the disability discrimination claim.

DiscriminationRetaliationHostile Work EnvironmentDisability DiscriminationRace DiscriminationReasonable AccommodationSummary JudgmentTexas Commission on Human Rights ActTitle VIIEmployment Law
References
83
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Vandever v. Voris

This case is an appeal from a compensation order entered by former Deputy Commissioner Voris under the Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act. The order concerned Libellant C. M. Vandever, who suffered a 40% permanent partial disability in 1948, which combined with a previous 60% permanent partial disability from 1939, resulted in total permanent disability. The Deputy Commissioner had ordered the employer and its insurance carrier to pay $10,000 for the second injury, with the expectation that the remainder for total permanent incapacity would come from the Special Fund. The Libellant sought payment for total permanent disability, either directly or from the Special Fund. The present Deputy Commissioner moved for a remand, suggesting an error in the previous determination, but this motion was overruled. The central controversy involved the interpretation of section 8(f) and section 44 of the Act, specifically whether these sections applied only to specific member injuries or also to general injuries. The court affirmed the original award, holding that section 8(f) is not limited to specific injuries and that the Libellant is entitled to the balance of compensation for total permanent disability from the Special Fund.

Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation ActPermanent Partial DisabilityPermanent Total DisabilitySecond Injury FundSpecial FundSubsequent InjuryDisability CompensationWage Earning CapacitySpinal InjuryPrior Injury
References
1
Case No. 2015-07-0114
Regular Panel Decision
Oct 12, 2015

Miller, Torris v. TA Operating Corp.

Torris Miller, a diesel mechanic, sustained a back injury at work on November 3, 2014, while changing a tractor-trailer tire for TA Operating Corp. He filed a request for an expedited hearing seeking past medical and temporary disability benefits. The Court found that Mr. Miller provided sufficient notice of his work-related injury to the employer. Although TA Operating Corp. argued that Mr. Miller's termination for job abandonment precluded him from receiving ongoing temporary disability benefits, the Court disagreed, finding the termination improper. Consequently, the Court granted Mr. Miller temporary total disability and temporary partial disability benefits, but denied his request for payment of past medical expenses due to insufficient proof of the reasonableness of the charges.

Workers' CompensationBack InjuryTemporary DisabilityJob AbandonmentMedical ExpensesNotice RequirementEmployer LiabilityTennessee LawExpedited HearingDisability Benefits
References
13
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 20, 1986

Claim of Foglia v. New York City Housing Authority

The claimant, a New York City Housing Authority police officer, sustained a compensable knee injury in 1974. The case was reopened in 1983 due to increased disability, and the Special Fund for Reopened Cases was put on notice for potential liability under Workers' Compensation Law § 25-a. The issue was whether there was an advance payment of compensation, which would relieve the Special Fund from liability. The claimant testified that he retired in 1983 but had been on limited duty performing clerical work at full salary since 1982 due to his injury. The Workers' Compensation Board determined that these full salary payments for lighter work constituted an advance payment of compensation. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding substantial evidence to support the determination that an advance payment of compensation relieved the Special Fund from liability.

Workers' Compensation BoardAdvance PaymentSpecial FundReopened CasesDisabilitySchedule LossPolice OfficerLimited DutySubstantial EvidenceFactual Determination
References
2
Showing 1-10 of 11,362 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational